Texas Is Throwing People In Jail For Failing To Pay Back Predatory Loans

At least six people have been jailed in Texas over the past two years for owing money on payday loans, according to a damning new analysis of public court records.

The economic advocacy group Texas Appleseed found that more than 1,500 debtors have been hit with criminal charges in the state -- even though Texas enacted a law in 2012 explicitly prohibiting lenders from using criminal charges to collect debts.

According to Appleseed's review, 1,576 criminal complaints were issued against debtors in eight Texas counties between 2012 and 2014. These complaints were often filed by courts with minimal review and based solely on the payday lender's word and frequently flimsy evidence. As a result, borrowers have been forced to repay at least $166,000, the group found.

Appleseed included this analysis in a Dec. 17 letter sent to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Texas attorney general's office and several other government entities.

It wasn't supposed to be this way. Using criminal courts as debt collection agencies is against federal law, the Texas constitution and the state’s penal code. To clarify the state law, in 2012 the Texas legislature passed legislation that explicitly describes the circumstances under which lenders are prohibited from pursuing criminal charges against borrowers.

It’s quite simple: In Texas, failure to repay a loan is a civil, not a criminal, matter. Payday lenders cannot pursue criminal charges against borrowers unless fraud or another crime is clearly established.

In 2013, a devastating Texas Observer investigation documented widespread use of criminal charges against borrowers before the clarification to state law was passed.

Nevertheless, Texas Appleseed's new analysis shows that payday lenders continue to routinely press dubious criminal charges against borrowers.

Ms. Jones, a 71-year-old who asked that her first name not be published in order to protect her privacy, was one of those 1,576 cases. (The Huffington Post reviewed and confirmed the court records associated with her case.) On March 3, 2012, Jones borrowed $250 from an Austin franchise of Cash Plus, a payday lender, after losing her job as a receptionist.

Four months later, she owed almost $1,000 and faced the possibility of jail time if she didn’t pay up.

The issue for Ms. Jones -- and most other payday borrowers who face criminal charges -- came down to a check. It’s standard practice at payday lenders for borrowers to leave either a check or a bank account number to obtain a loan. These checks and debit authorizations are the backbone of the payday lending system. They’re also the backbone of most criminal charges against payday borrowers.

Ms. Jones initially obtained her loan by writing Cash Plus a check for $271.91 -- the full amount of the loan plus interest and fees -- with the understanding that the check was not to be cashed unless she failed to make her payments. The next month, when the loan came due, Jones didn’t have the money to pay in full. She made a partial payment, rolling over the loan for another month and asking if she could create a payment plan to pay back the remainder. But Jones told HuffPost that CashPlus rejected her request and instead deposited her initial check.

Jones' check to Cash Plus was returned with a notice that her bank account had been closed. She was then criminally charged with bad check writing. Thanks to county fines, Jones now owed $918.91 -- just four months after she had borrowed $250.

In Texas, bad check writing and "theft by check" are Class B misdemeanors, punishable by up to 180 days in jail as well as potential fines and additional consequences. In the typical "hot check" case, a person writes a check that they know will bounce in order to buy something.

But Texas law is clear that checks written to secure a payday loan, like Jones’, are not "hot checks." If the lender cashes the check when the loan is due and it bounces, the assumption isn’t that the borrower stole money by writing a hot check –- it’s just that they can’t repay their loan.

That doesn’t mean that loan transactions are exempt from Texas criminal law. However, the intent of the 2012 clarification to state law is that a bounced check written to a payday lender alone cannot justify criminal charges.

Yet in Texas, criminal charges are frequently substantiated by little more than the lender's word and evidence that is often inadequate. For instance, the criminal complaint against Jones simply includes a photocopy of her bounced check.

Making matters worse, Texas Justice of the Peace courts, which handle claims under $10,000, appear to be rubber-stamping bad check affidavits as they receive them and indiscriminately filing criminal charges. Once the charges are filed, the borrower must enter a plea or face an arrest warrant. If the borrower pleads guilty, they must pay a fine on top of the amount owed to the lender.

Jones moved after she borrowing from Cash Plus, so she did not get notice of the charges by mail. Instead, a county constable showed up at her new address. Jones said she was terrified and embarrassed by the charges. She had to enter a plea in the case or else face an arrest warrant and possible jail time. In addition to the fines, Jones was unable to renew her driver's license until the case was resolved.

Craig Wells, the president and CEO of Cash Plus, which is based in California but has about 100 franchises in 13 states, told HuffPost that “this was the first I’ve heard of this case.” He said that the company instructs its franchises to adhere to all state laws and regulations. On the company’s website, Wells says his goal is for Cash Plus to be “as-close-to-perfect-a-business-as-one-can-get," adding that the company’s “top-notch customer experience keeps them coming back over and over again. ”

Emilio Herrera, the Cash Plus franchisee who submitted the affidavit against Jones, told HuffPost that he does not remember her case. But he added that he tries to work out payment plans with all his customers, and that it is common for his customers to pay back loans in very small increments.

In response to a request for comment from HuffPost about Appleseed's letter, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau spokesman Sam Gilford said, "Consumers should not be subjected to illegal threats when they are struggling to pay their bills, and lenders should not expect to break the law without consequences."

One reason that lenders' predatory behavior continues is simple administrative overload. Travis County Justice of the Peace Susan Steeg, who approved the charges against Jones, told HuffPost that due to the volume of bad check affidavits her court receives, her office has been instructed by the county attorney to file charges as affidavits are submitted. The charges are then passed along to the county attorney's office. It is up to the county attorney to review the cases and decide whether to prosecute or dismiss them.

But Travis County Attorney David Escamilla told HuffPost that his office had never instructed the Justice of the Peace courts to approve all bad check complaints, and said he did not know why or where Steeg would have gotten that understanding. “We don’t do it,” Escamilla said, referring to the usage of the criminal hot checks process to enforce the terms of lending agreements.

When cases are wrongfully filed by payday lenders, how quickly they are dismissed depends on prosecutors' workload and judgment. Often, it is not clear that theft by check cases are payday loans, since the name of the payday lender is not immediately distinguishable from that of an ordinary merchant.

District attorneys may also receive these complaints and have the ability to file criminal charges. According to Ann Baddour, a policy analyst at Appleseed, the DAs seem to operate with more discretion than the county attorneys, but the outcomes were arguably as perverse. Baddour said one DA told her that of the hot check complaints he had received, none had led to criminal charges or prosecutions. Instead, he said, his office sent letters threatening criminal charges unless the initial loan amounts plus fees were repaid.

The DA, who seemed to think he was showing evidence of his proper conduct, was instead admitting that his office functioned as a debt collector.

With the help of free legal aid, Jones’ case was eventually dismissed, and she said the court waived her outstanding payment to Cash Plus. But not all debtors are as fortunate.

Despite being against state law, the data show that criminal complaints are an effective way for payday lenders to get borrowers to pay. Of the 1,576 criminal complaints Appleseed analyzed, 385 resulted in the borrower making a repayment on their loan. In Collin County alone, 204 of the 700 criminal complaints based on payday lenders’ affidavits ended in payments totaling $131,836.

This success in using criminal charges to coerce money from borrowers means that payday lenders have a financial incentive to file criminal charges against debtors with alarming regularity -- even if those charges are eventually rightfully dismissed.

Because Appleseed’s study only covered eight of Texas’ 254 counties, there are likely more cases statewide. And Texas is not alone. In 2011, The Wall Street Journal found that more than a third of states allow borrowers to be jailed, even though federal law mandates that loan repayment be treated as a civil issue rather than a criminal one.

“There’s a lot more to learn about the practice itself, how widely it’s used, and its effect on consumers,” Mary Spector, a law professor at Southern Methodist University who specializes in debt collection issues, told HuffPost. “I think they’ve uncovered the tip of the iceberg.”

Minimum Wage Hikes Force Walmart To Raise Pay At More Than 1,400 Stores

By Nathan Layne

CHICAGO, Dec 24 (Reuters) - Minimum wage increases across the United States will prompt Wal-Mart Stores Inc to adjust base salaries at 1,434 stores, impacting about a third of its U.S. locations, according to an internal memo reviewed by Reuters.

The memo, which was sent to store managers earlier this month, offers insight into the impact of minimum wage hikes in 21 states due to come into effect on or around Jan. 1, 2015.

These are adjustments that Wal-Mart and other employers have to make each year, but growing attention to the issue has expanded the scope of the change. Thirteen U.S. states lifted the minimum wage in 2014, up from 10 in 2013 and 8 in 2012.

Wal-Mart spokeswoman Brooke Buchanan said the company was making the changes to "ensure our stores in the 21 states comply with the law."

For Wal-Mart, the biggest private employer in the United States with 1.3 million workers, minimum wage legislation is not a small thing. Its operating model is built on keeping costs under close control as it attracts consumers with low prices and operates on tight margins.

In recent years, it has been struggling to grow sales after many lower-income Americans lost jobs or income in the financial crisis.

The Wal-Mart memo shows that there will be changes to its pay structure, including a narrowing of the gap in the minimum premium paid to those in higher skilled positions, such as deli associates and department supervisors, over lower grade jobs.

Wal-Mart will also combine its lowest three pay grades, which include cashiers, cart pushers and maintenance, into one base rate.

The changes appear in part to be an effort to offset the anticipated upswing in labor costs, according to a manager who was implementing the changes at his store.

"Essentially that wage compression at the upper level of the hourly associate is going to help absorb that cost of the wage increase at the lower level," said the manager, who spoke on condition of anonymity.


MORE CHANGE TO COME?

Wal-Mart's critics - including a group of its workers backed by labor unions - say the retailer pays its hourly workers too little, forcing some to seek government assistance that effectively provides the company with an indirect taxpayer subsidy. Labor groups have been calling for Wal-Mart, other retailers and fast-food chains to pay at least $15 an hour.

Wal-Mart has indicated it may make more changes to its compensation structure in 2015. Chief Executive Doug McMillon recently said the company would improve opportunities for workers, including getting the roughly 6,000 people who make the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour at its stores off that rate.

"In the world there is a debate over inequity, and sometimes we get caught up in that," he told TV presenter Charlie Rose in an interview this month. McMillon said he would take steps to ensure the company is "a meritocracy, an opportunity for people to do more."

The state minimum wage changes range from a 17 percent increase in South Dakota to $8.50 to a modest rise of 2 percent to $8.05 in Arizona. They will also impact many of Wal-Mart's big retail rivals, such as Target Corp, and fast-food chains like McDonald's Corp.

A Target spokeswoman said she could not provide details on how many employees might be impacted by the changes on Jan. 1. McDonald's could not be immediately reached for comment.

Wal-Mart estimates its average full-time hourly wage is $12.92, and says that it pays competitive wages and offers its employees ample opportunity for advancement.

Edward Jones analyst Brian Yarbrough said it is tough to estimate the cost impact of the minimum wage changes without knowing the number of Wal-Mart employees affected. While many employees might start out at the minimum rate, they advance to higher pay rates over time, he noted.

Wal-Mart said last month that investment in wages and higher health care costs drove a 3.5 percent increase in operating expenses in its most recent quarter. Wal-Mart is unlikely to cut staff or reduce hours to keep those costs in check, given that it has made a renewed push to improve service in its stores, Yarbrough said. (Reporting by Nathan Layne; Editing by Michele Gershberg and Martin Howell)

Where To See 'The Interview'

Merry Christmas! After one major hack, a studio flip flop and a petition organized by some of the country's most prominent independent movie theaters, "The Interview" is back in theaters. Here's where you can see it.

The list below, provided via the film's Facebook page, will be updated as changes or additions are made. HuffPost Entertainment will attempt to keep it as accurate as possible.

Alabama
Clarke Theatre 3, Andalusia
The Edge 12, Birmingham
Boaz Cinema 9, Boaz
Clark Cinema 1 & 2, Enterprise
Fort Payne Cinemas 6, Fort Payne
Edge Cinema 8, Greenville
Madison Square Stadium 8, Huntsville
Continental Cinema 6, Troy

Arkansas
Silver Screen Cinemas 8, Cabot
Stars Cinema 6, El Dorado
Behind the Mall Cinema 5, Hot Springs
Riverdale 10, Little Rock
Cinema 8, Searcy
Highland 2 Cinema, Hardy (Jan. 2)
Home Baxter Cinema 5, Mountain (Jan. 2)

Arizona
Lake Havasu Cinema 10, Lake Havasu
Ak-Chin 12, Maricopa
Sawmill Theatres, Payson
Ultraluxe Scottsdale Pavillions 11, Scottsdale
WME Theatre, Show Low
Uptown 3 Theatre, Sierra Vista
Harkins Theatres, Tempe
The Loft Cinema, Tucson

The Bahamas
Galleria Cinema 11, Nassau (Jan. 2)
Cinemas 5, Freeport (Jan. 2)
West JFK 6, Nassau (Jan. 2)

California
Agoura Hills Stadium 8, Agoura Hills
Angel Cinema Six, Angels Camp
Avenal Theatre, Avenal
Foothill Cinema Stadium 10, Azusa
Maya Bakersfield 16 Cinemas, Bakersfiled
East Hills Mall, Bakersfield
Barstow Station 6, Barstow
Elmwood 3 Theatres, Berkeley
Mary Pickford Theatre, Cathedral City
Commerce 14, City of Commerce
Fairfax 6 Theaters, Fairfax
Palladio 16 Cinemas, Folsom
Fontana 8, Fontana
Fortuna 6, Fortuna
4 Star Cinemes, Garden Grove
Granada Hills 9, Granada Hills
Civic Plaza 12, Hesperia
Blvd Cinemas 3, Lancaster
Livermore Cinemas, Livermore
The Cinefamily, Los Angeles
Los Feliz 3, Los Angeles
Contra Costa Cinemas 8, Martinez
Osio Plaza Theatre 6, Monterey
Tennant Station Stadium Cinemas, Morgan Hill
Laemmle Theaters, North Hollywood (Jan. 1)
Cinémas Palme D'Or, Palm Desert
Camelot 3, Palm Springs
Perris 10, Perris
Boulevard Cinemas 14, Petaluma
Maya Century Plaza 16, Pittsburg
Prime Cinema 6, Red Bluff
University Village 10, Riverside
Jurupa Stadium 14, Riverside
Mission Grove Theatres, Riverside
Maya Salinas 14, Salina
Sterling 6, San Bernadino
Almaden 7, San Jose
Camera 3 Cinemas, San Jose
Arlington, Santa Barbara
Del Mar Theatre 3, Santa Cruz
Santa Paula 7, Santa Paula
Scotts Valley 10 Cinema, Scotts Valley
Sebastopol Cinemas 9, Sebastopol
Sonoma Cinema 9, Sonoma
Janss Marketplace 9, Thousand Oaks
Van Nuys Plant 16, Van Nuys
Westminster 10, Westminster
Ultraluxe Cinemas, Anaheim
Crest, Westwood
MGN Five Star Cinema, Glendale
Stadium Cinemas Lemoore Stadium Cinemas, Lemoore (Jan. 1)
State Theatre, Modesto (Jan. 1)
New Parkway Twin, Oakland (Jan. 1)
Park Cinemas 9, Paso Robles (Jan. 1)
Met Cinema 5, Oakhurst (Jan. 2)
Ultrastar Gardenwalk, Anaheim (Jan. 2)
Lido, Newport Beach (Jan. 2)
Lido Live, Newport Beach

Colorado
Alamo, Littleton
Denver Filmcenter/ Colfax, Denver (Jan. 1)
Lyric Cinema Cafe, Ft. Collins (Jan. 1)
The Foundry Cinema and Bowl, Fraser (Jan. 2)

Connecticut
Spotlight Theatres Front Street Stadium, Hartford
Apple Cinemas Waterbury 10, Waterbury

Washington D.C.
West End Cinema, Washington D.C.

Delaware
Westown Movies, Middleton
Movies at Midway 14, Rehoboth Beach
Penn Cinemas Riverfront, Wilmington

Florida
Prado Stadium 12, Bonita Springs
T-Bird Drive-In 14, Fort Lauderdale
Edison Park 8, Fort Myers
Sun-Ray Cinema, Jacksonville
Tropic 4 Cinema, Key West
Lake Worth Drive-In 2, Lake Worth
Touchstar Cinemas Southchase 7, Orlando
Nova Cinemas of Palm Bay, Palm Bay
Fun Lan Drive 4, Tampa
Satellite Cinema 10, Titusville
Treehouse Cinema, Gulf Breeze
Tampa Pitcher Show, Tampa (Jan. 2)
Majestic 11, Vero Beach (Jan. 2)
Cinema World 16, West Melbourne (Jan. 2)

Georgia
Plaza Theater, Atlanta
Cordele Stadium 5 Cinemas, Cordele
Parkside Main Stadium 8, Greensboro
Royal 13, Pooler
Aurora Cineplex 10, Roswell
Eisenhower Cinema 6, Savannah
Cine 2, Athens (Jan. 1)

Idaho
Village Cinema, Meridian
Bonner Mall Cinemas 6, Ponderay
Magic Valley Cinema 13, Twin Falls
The Magic Lantern 6, Ketchum (Jan. 1)

Illinois
Arlington Heights, Arlington
Bloomington Galaxy 14, Bloomington
Buffalo Grove Theatre 5, Buffalo Grove
O'Fallon 15, O'Fallon
Roxy Cinemas 6, Ottawa
Willow Knolls 14, Peoria
Reynolds Landmark 10, Peoria
Savoy 16, Savoy
Art Theater Co-Op, Champaign (Jan. 2)
Hollywood Blvd. Cinema, Woodridge
Illinois 5, Jacksonville (Jan. 2)
Hollywood Palms, Naperville

Indiana
Bones Theatre 4, Columbia City
Greendale Cinema 10, Greendale
Wolf 10 Theatres, Greensburg
Georgetown 14, Indianapolis
Jasper 8 Theatres, Jasper
Portage 16, Portage

Iowa
Cedar Rapids Galaxy 16, Cedar Rapids
Mindframe 6 Theatre, Dubuque (Jan. 2)

Kansas
Cinetopia 17, Overland Park
Maiden Alley Cinema, Paducah (Jan. 1)

Kentucky
Theatres of Georgetown 7, Georgetown
Village 8 Theatre, Louisville
Riverfill Cinemas 10, Pikeville
Tri-County Cineplex 8, Corbin (Jan. 2)
Cheri 7, Murray (Jan. 2)

Louisiana
Chalmette Movies, Chalmette
Hollywood Cinemas 7, La Place
Robinson Center, Shreveport

Maine
Hollywood Cinemas, Bangor
Caribou Cinema 4, Caribou

Maryland
Eastpoint Movies 10, Baltimore
Xscape 14 At Brandywine, Brandywine
Leitersburg Cinemas, Hagerstown
Kentlands Stadium 10, Gaithersburg (Jan. 2)

Massachusetts
AppleCinemas, Cambridge
Hollywood Hits, Danvers
Cinema Pub, North Attleboro
Cinema 95, Salisbury
Cinema World Ten, Fitchburg (Jan. 2)
Gardner Cinema 8, Gardner (Jan. 2)
Greenfield Garden Cinemas, Greenfield (Jan. 2)
Cinema 10, Leominster (Jan. 2)
Somerville Theatre 5, Somerville (Jan. 2)
Ent Cinema South Dennis Cinema 10, South Dennis (jan. 2)
Springfield Plaza 16, Springfield (Jan. 2)

Michigan
State Theater, Ann Arbor
Quality 16, Ann Arbor
Cloverland 4 Cinema, Ironwood
Alamo, Kalamazoo
The Bijou, Traverse City
State - Wayne Theatre 4, Wayne
West River 9, Farmington Hills (Jan. 1)
Emagine 18, Canton (Jan. 1)
Cinema Detroit, Detroit (Jan. 2)

Minnesota
Cambridge 5 Cinemas, Cambridge
Premiere Theatre 6, Cloquet
Quarry Cold Spring 5 Cinema, Cold Spring
Fairmont 5, Fairmont
Cine 5 Theatre, International Falls
St. Anthony 5, Minneapolis
North Branch Cinema 7, North Branch
Grand Makwa 4 Cinema, Onamia
Rochester Galaxy 14, Rochester
Main Street Cinema 6, Sauk Centre
Midway Mall 8 Cinemas, Alexandria (Jan. 2)

Missouri
Arnold 14 Cinema, Arnold
Blue Springs 8, Blue Springs
Cape West 14, Cape Girardeau
Chesterfield Galaxy 14, Chesterfield
Pharaoh Cinema 4, Independence
Alamo Main Street, Kansas City
Screenland Armour, North Kansas City
Chase Park Plaza, St. Louis
Des Peres 14, St. Louis
Galleria 6, St. Louis
MX Movies, St. Louis (Jan. 2)
Warrenton 8 Cinemas, Warrenton
Glass Sword Cinema 6, West Plains
Ragtag Cinema, Columbia (Jan. 1)
Moxie Cinema, Springfield (Jan. 1)

Montana
Pharaohplex 6, Hamilton

Nebraska
Midwest Theatre, Scottsbluff (Jan. 2)

Nevada
Mesquite Stadium 6, Mesquite
Ironwood Stadium Cinema 8, Minden
Riverside Theatres 6, Laughlin (Jan. 2)
Riverside Cinemas, Laughlin (Jan. 2)

New Hampshire
Keene Cinemas, Keene
Lebanon Cinemas Six, Lebanon (Jan. 2)

New Jersey
Allwood Cinemas 6, Clifton
Hudson Cinema 7, Jersey City
City Plex 12 Newark, Newark
Columbia Park 12, North Bergen
Middlebrook Cinema 10, Ocean Township
Fabian 8 Cinema, Paterson
Rutgers Cinema, Piscataway (Jan. 1)

New Mexico
Starmax Deming, Deming
Jean Cocteau Cinema, Santa Fe
Fiesta D/1 3, Carlsbad (Jan. 1)

New York
Movieplex 10, Auburn
Williamsburg Cinemas, Brooklyn (Jan. 2)
Movietime Cinemas 10, Canandaigua
American 5, Canton
Cortland Plaza Theatre, Cortland
Movieplex 59, Dunkirk
Movieplex 8, Hudson
Cinema Arts Centre, Huntington
Cinema Village, Manhattan
Quad Cinema 4, Manhattan
Massena Movieplex 8, Massena
Island Cinemas, Mastic
Merrick Cinemas, Merrick
New Windsor 12, New Windsor
Crystal Cinema 8, Painted Post
Orpheum Triples, Saugerties
Center Cinema 5, Queens
Kew Gardens Cinemas, Queens
Main Street Six, Queens
Alamo, Yonkers
Flix Theatre 10, Depew (Jan. 1)
Lakewood Cinema 8 (Jan. 1)
Movieplex 8, Carmel (Jan. 2)
Movieworld Cinemas, Douglaston (Jan. 2)
Showtime Cinemas, Newburgh (Jan. 2)

North Carolina
Northgate Stadium 10, Durham
Neuse Theatre, New Bern
Palace Pointe, Roxboro
Quin Theatre 4, Sylva
Carousel Cinemas 15, Greensboro
Kingsway Cinema 4, Eden (Jan. 2)
Ruby Cinema 4, Franklin (Jan. 2)
Market Place Square 6, Henderson (Jan. 2)
Cameo Art House, Fayetteville (Jan. 2)

North Dakota
Fargo Theatre, Fargo
Grand Theatre 6, Williston

Ohio
Esquire 6, Cincinnati
Tower City Cinemas, Cleveland
Gateway Theatre 7, Columbus
Grandview Theatre, Columbus
Movies 10, Nelsonville
Pierce Point Cinema 10, Amelia (Jan. 2)
Danberry Chillicothe 10, Chillicothe (Jan. 2)
Atlas Cinemas Midway Mall 8, Elyria (Jan. 2)
Great Lakes Cinemas Stadium 16, Mentor (Jan. 2)
Danbarry Cinemas 10, Middleton (Jan. 2)

Oklahoma
Heritage Park 7, Altus
Valley View Cinema 6, Chickasha
Riverwalk Movies 8, Jenks
Circle, Tulsa
Showest 4, Weatherford
McCurtain Cinema 5, Idabel (Jan. 2)
Orpheum 2, Okmulgee (Jan. 2)

Oregon
Cinetopia Progress Ridge 14, Beaverton
Darkside Cinema 4, Corvallis
Bijou Art Cinemas 2, Eugene
Hollywood Theatre 3, Portland
Forest Theatre, Forest Grove (Jan. 2)
Fox Theatre, Dallas (Jan. 2)

Pennsylvania
Dependable Drive-In, Coraopolis
Pocono Community Theatre, East Stroudsburg
Movie Town Cinemas 8, Elizabethtown
Richland Cinemas, Johnstown
Mahoning Valley Cinemas 8, Lehighton
Pocono Movieplex, Marshalls Creek
Majestic Cinemas 7, Matamoras
Southside Works, Pittsburgh
Honesdale Cinema 6, Honesdale (Jan. 2)
Cinema & Drafthouse, West Hazelton (Jan. 2)

Rhode Island
Cable Car Cinema, Providence
Cinemaworld Lincoln Mall 16, Lincoln (Jan. 2)

South Carolina
Terrace Theater, Charleston
Nickelodeon Theatre, Columbia
Crown 2, Lancaster

South Dakota
Elks Theatre, Rapid City (Jan. 1)
Northern Hills Six, Spearfish (Jan. 2)

Tennessee
Montana Drive-In 3, Estill Springs
Franklin Theatre, Franklin
Premiere 6, Murfressboro
The Belcourt Theater, Nashville
Parisian Cinema 6, Paris (Jan. 2)
Southgate Cinema 6, Savannah (Jan. 2)

Texas
Town & Country Drive-In, Abilene
Alamo Lakeline, Austin
Alamo Slaughter, Austin
Alamo South Lamar, Austin
Alamo Ritz, Austin
Venetian 8 Bar & Grill, Carrollton
Pine Hollow 6, Conroe
Look Cinemas Dallas, Dallas
Texas Theatre, Dallas
Galaxy Drive-In 5, Ennis
D-Max 6, Gainesville
Alamo Vintage Park, Houston
Alamo Mason Park, Katy
Alamo, Lubbock
Star Cinema Grill, Missouri City
Mt. Pleasant Southside 6, Mt. Pleasant
Alamo Marketplace, New Braunfels
North Shore Cinema 8, Portland
Alamo, Richardson
Alamo Park North, San Antonio
Alamo Stone Oaks, San Antonio
Alamo Westlakes, San Antonio
City Base Cinema, San Antonio
Mayan Palace 13, San Antonio
Rialto Bistro 9, San Antonio
Silverado 19, Tomball
Star Cinema 6, Webster
Movies Five (Midway Mall), Sherman (Jan. 1)
Majestic 6, Bonham (Jan. 2)
Majestic 12, Greenville (Jan. 2)
Times Square Cinema 6, Tyler (Jan. 2)
Plaza 2, Vernon (Jan. 2)
Wellborne Cinemas, Alvin (Jan. 2)

Utah
Historic Cedar Theatre, Cedar City
Moviegrille, Ogden
Park City Film Series/Prospector Theatre, Park City
Walker Cinema 8, Perry
Brewvies Cinemas Pub, Salt Lake City
Megaplex Theatres, South Jordan
Main Street Cinema 6, St. George

Vermont
Palace 9, South Burlington (Jan. 1)
Bijou Four, Morrisville (Jan. 1)

Virginia
21st Century Cinemas 12, Abingdon
Alamo Drafthouse, Ashburn
Sunchase Cinema 8, Farmville
York River Crossing Cinema, Hayes
Manassas 4 Cinemas, Manassas
Hollywood Cinema, Martinsville
Cinema City Stadium 9, Norton
Page Theatre 7, Luray (Jan. 2)

Washington
Bainbridge Cinemas 5, Bainbridge Island
Olympic Cinemas, Bremerton
Grand Meridian, Ellensburg
Plaza 3 Cinemas, Oak Harbor
Ark Lodge Cinemas, Seattle
Stanwood Cinemas 5, Stanwood
Grand Tacoma 4, Tacoma
Cinetopia 8, Vancouver
Cinetopia Vancouver Mall, Vancouver
Yelm Cinemas 8, Yelm
Blue Fox D/I, Oak Harbor (Jan. 2)

West Virginia
Elkins Cinema 8, Elkins
Tygart Valley 7, Fairmont
Park Place Cinema 11, Charleston (Jan. 2)
Fountain Place Cinema 8, Logan (Jan. 2)

Wisconsin
Bay 6 Theatre, Ashland
Beloit Luxury 10, Beloit
Vilas Cinemas 4, Eagle River
Fond Du Luc Theatre, Fond Du Lac
Hartford Cinemas 6, Hartford
Hayward Cinema 4, Hayward
Movies 16 Theatre, Janesville
Grand Theatre 4, New London
Millennium 6 Cinema, Platteville
Shawano Theatres 4, Shawano
Sparta Cinema 6, Sparta
Sturgeon Bay Cinemas 6, Sturgeon Bay

Wyoming
Jackson Hole Twin Cinema, Jackson
The Movies 3, Rawlins
Gem Theatres, Riverton
Fox III Theatre, Casper (Jan. 2)
Lincoln Theatre, Cheyenne (Jan. 2)
Foothills Six Cinema, Gillette (Jan. 2)
Star Stadium 10, Rock Springs (Jan. 2)
Centennial Six, Sheridan (Jan. 2)

Children Who Eat More Fast Food Show Less Academic Improvement, Study Shows

Fast food has long been linked to obesity, but a new study suggests that it may also affect children's educational achievement.

The study, led by Kelly M. Purtell at Ohio State University, tracked students between fifth and eighth grade, when students are assessed in reading, math and science. Researchers used data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Kindergarten Cohort, a national survey covering about 12,000 students. In fifth grade, the students were asked how much fast food they had eaten in the past week (the survey was not necessarily given the same week as the academic assessment). Researchers then compared the frequency of fast food eaten to the academic achievement gains between fifth and eighth grade.

Researchers found that students who ate more fast food overall had slower growth in academic achievement. Students who reported eating fast food once a day had slower growth in math, reading and science than students who ate no fast food. The more fast food a student reported eating, the lower their rate of academic improvement.

"High levels of fast food consumption were predictive of lower growth in all three academic subjects," Purtell told The Huffington Post.

The decreases were most pronounced in math. If students reported eating any fast food, their assessments reflected lower gains in math achievement. Meanwhile, lower science gains were related to eating fast food four to six times a week or daily. Improvement in reading was only affected with daily fast food consumption.

According to the report, less than 30 percent of participants had no fast food at all in the week before being asked. About half of participants had eaten fast food one to three times that week. Ten percent had eaten it four to six times, and the remaining 10 percent ate fast food every day.

"These findings indicate that fast food consumption is linked with deleterious developmental outcomes in children beyond obesity," the study says. However, the researchers do not suggest eliminating fast food altogether. Instead, they suggest that reducing the frequency of consumption is a more critical issue.

Purtell said that, based on the results, it is "not as problematic if a family occasionally goes to a fast food restaurant, as opposed to a family that makes it a regular part of their routine."

The researchers theorize that children who eat fast food frequently are not getting the proper nutrients they need to develop optimally. Fast food does not have sufficient iron and has too much fat and added sugar. The study accounted for other possible contributing factors, such as parent education, family income, food insecurity, and TV-watching to show that fast food itself had a correlation to academic scores.

The researchers suggested several ways to counter the negative effects of fast food. First, they noted that parents often give children fast food because it is easy. If food preparation were less stressful, they say, fast food consumption would decrease. They suggest imposing taxes on fast food as a disincentive for those who might resort to fast food for its low prices.

"Fast food is really pervasive right now, and there are a lot of reasons why kids eat it and why families use it," Purtell said. Because of this, Purtell said, "we have to think broadly about lots of different ways to make families not be reliant on fast food."

Fast food is often highly present and available to children. There are many fast food restaurants near -- and sometimes in -- schools, and there is sometimes advertising for fast food in or around schools. If this were not the case, the researchers posit, students might eat fast food less frequently.

Google Doesn't Want To Go It Alone With Driverless Cars

Google doesn't want to be the next Ford.

The Internet behemoth, bent on building the first fully-automated cars, said Friday that it plans to partner with traditional automakers when development of its self-driving technology is complete.

"We don't particularly want to become a car maker," Chris Urmson, the director of Google's self-driving car project, told The Wall Street Journal. "We are talking [with] and looking for partners."

Auto executives in Detroit and abroad confirmed they had been approached by Google, the Journal reported.

Google did not respond to a request for comment on Saturday.

Recent advances in driverless technology have ignited competition in Silicon Valley. Google announced in April that its automated cars could successfully detect and avoid pedestrians and bicyclists. In October, Tesla Motors equipped the new D line of its Model S sedan with a limited autopilot feature. Mercedes-Benz's latest S-Class features a "traffic jam assist" that allows the car to automatically follow the vehicle in front of it at at low speeds.

Still, fully automated vehicles have a long drive ahead of them before they hit the market.

Regulatory and insurance policies will have to come first. Moreover, the technology faces serious ethical questions -- namely, if an accident becomes unavoidable, who should die?

Consider this scenario, spelled out by Jason Millar in the September issue of Wired:

You are travelling along a single-lane mountain road in an autonomous car that is fast approaching a narrow tunnel. Just before entering the tunnel a child errantly runs into the road and trips in the centre of the lane, effectively blocking the entrance to the tunnel. The car is unable to brake in time to avoid a crash. It has but two options: hit and kill the child, or swerve into the wall on either side of the tunnel, thus killing you. Now ask yourself, Who should decide whether the car goes straight or swerves? Manufacturers? Users? Legislators?

Google is as yet unprepared to answer that question.

"People are philosophizing about it," Ron Medford, the director of safety on Google's self-driving car project, told The Associated Press last month, "but the question about real-world capability and real-world events that can affect us, we really haven't studied that issue."

Your Boss Can't Stop You From Organizing A Union Over Work Email: Feds

WASHINGTON -- In a significant win for labor unions, federal regulators ruled Thursday that employers can't prevent their workers from using company email to organize and discuss their working conditions outside of work.

The decision issued by the National Labor Relations Board gives workers a statutory right to use work email systems for those purposes after hours, so long as they already have access to work email. The ruling overturns a Bush-era ruling by a more conservative labor board that said workers have no such right.

The outcome of the case, Purple Communications, Inc. and Communications Workers of America, is significant because it assures that pro-union employees can easily communicate with their colleagues about organizing. Aside from the right to pursue unionization, the ruling would also guarantee that workers can discuss basic things like pay and benefits via their work email without their bosses stopping them.

Employers had feared and probably expected just such a decision, considering the more liberal makeup of the NLRB in the Obama era. Board members called the decision "carefully limited."

In the case, Purple Communications, which develops communication services for deaf people, had maintained a policy stating that work email could be used for businesses purposes only. CWA, which lost a union election at the company in California, argued that the policy was too strict and infringed on workers' rights under the National Labor Relations Act, the Depression-era law establishing collective bargaining rights.

The board's three liberal members said the earlier ruling issued in 2007 didn't take into account the role that email plays in modern life. The two conservative members dissented.

"By focusing too much on employers’ property rights and too little on the importance of email as a means of workplace communication, the Board failed to adequately protect employees’ rights under the Act and abdicated its responsibility 'to adapt the Act to the changing patterns of industrial life,'" the majority wrote.

The ruling did, however, include two caveats. It limited the rights only to workers who otherwise have work email -- i.e., the ruling does not mean that companies have to give workers email access -- and it also carved out the possibly of "special circumstances" that would let an employer ban email use, when it was "necessary to maintain production or discipline."

Thursday's ruling was one in a batch expected to come down before the end of the year, when one current member's term will expire.

U.S. Top Court Rules No Worker Pay For Security Screening

(Adds reaction from plaintiffs' lawyer and Amazon, paragraphs 4-5)

By Lawrence Hurley

WASHINGTON, Dec 9 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday handed a victory to employers over worker compensation, ruling that companies do not have to pay employees for the time they spend undergoing security checks at the end of their shifts in a case involving an Amazon.com Inc warehousing contractor.

The court decided by a 9-0 vote that employees of Integrity Staffing Solutions facilities in Nevada, where Amazon merchandise is processed and shipped, cannot claim compensation for time spent undergoing screening - up to half an hour a day, according to the workers - aimed at protecting against theft.

The ruling is likely to benefit other companies facing similar lawsuits including Amazon, CVS Health Corp and Apple Inc, according to Integrity's lawyers. The cases against Amazon, Integrity and other staffing companies affect up to 400,000 workers, with plaintiffs claiming hundreds of millions of dollars in damages, according to court filings.

Amazon spokeswoman Kelly Cheeseman said the allegations in the Integrity case of a lengthy security screening process were "simply not true." She added that Amazon's screening process is designed to take 90 seconds per employee at its facilities.

Mark Thierman, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said the ruling leaves thousands of workers "short-changed a half hour per day." Many workers will still be able to pursue similar claims under state law, Thierman added.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote on behalf of the court that the screening process is not a "principal activity" of the workers' jobs under a law called the Fair Labor Standards Act and therefore is not subject to compensation.

For workers to be paid, the activity in question must be "an intrinsic element" of the job and "one with which the employee cannot dispense if he is to perform his principal activities," Thomas wrote.

The high court reversed an April 2013 ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which had found that the screenings were an integral part of the warehousing job done for the benefit of the employer and should be compensated.

Employees had sued Integrity Staffing Solutions for back wages and overtime pay, saying they should have been compensated for time spent in security screenings.

Amazon, the world's largest online retailer, is not directly involved in the case. A business group called the Retail Litigation Center, in a brief supporting the warehousing company, said the industry in general loses $16 billion annually in thefts.

The case is Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc v. Jesse Busk and Laurie Castro, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 13-433. (Additional reporting by Deepa Seetharaman; Editing by Will Dunham)